Roe v Kimberley Land Council Aboriginal Corporation [2010] FCA 809

Roe v Kimberley Land Council Aboriginal Corporation [2010] FCA 809

Only the joint applicants have standing to act on behalf of the claim group; since Mr Roe acted without Mr Shaw, standing was lacking. Section 84D does not provide a basis to cure the defect of authorisation for this separate proceeding. Leave to amend was refused, and the proceedings were dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Motion/application / Judgment on Leave to Amend, Standing and Dismissal
Outcome
Application dismissed; leave to amend refused; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
['standing in Native Title Proceedings' 'representative Proceedings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'authorisation Under Native Title Act' 'conflict of Interest']
['native Title' 'civil Procedure'] ['standing in Native Title Proceedings' 'representative Proceedings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'authorisation Under Native Title Act' 'conflict of Interest']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Motion/application / Judgment on Leave to Amend, Standing and Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Roe had standing as sole applicant or could proceed without joint action with Mr Shaw.' 'Whether the defect in standing can be cured under s 84D of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).' 'Whether leave should be granted to amend the proceeding and convert into a representative proceeding under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

Only the joint applicants have standing to act on behalf of the claim group; since Mr Roe acted without Mr Shaw, standing was lacking. Section 84D does not provide a basis to cure the defect of authorisation for this separate proceeding. Leave to amend was refused, and the proceedings were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; leave to amend refused; costs awarded.

Orders

  • ['The motion of Mr Joseph Roe dated 14 May 2010 be dismissed.' 'The amended motion of Mr Joseph Roe dated 13 July 2010 be dismissed.' 'The application be dismissed.' 'Joseph Edward Roe pay the costs of each of Cyril Shaw and the respondent of each of the motions and the application to be taxed.']